In many countries of the Global South, the author found unique forms of democracy and participatory processes have emerged that differ from those typically found in Western nations.
However, I question whether Western democracies still serve as models for the world. I perceive a lot of double standards in their narratives, bordering on propaganda, and a growing disconnect between the people and their governments in Europe, the U.S., and elsewhere in the West.
This disconnect leads to a loss of faith in democracy and democratic institutions, including political parties, the media, and governments, as evidenced by a Dimap poll in Saxony, Germany. Consequently, in the realm of political representation, the right and far-right are gaining ground and have become the main political force in several European countries. In Germany, the far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD) is gaining ground so rapidly that a sense of despair has emerged within the political establishment, prompting discussions about potentially banning the party altogether.
The State of Democracy in the West and the U.S. Promotion of Dictatorships
A few months ago, Professor Mark Bovens of Utrecht University asserted, “Today, almost three-quarters of the global population lives in an autocracy, and only 13% live in a fully-fledged democracy under the rule of law.” With this statement, Professor Bovens was specifically referring to Western nations, including the US, Canada, Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan. I will analyse the democratic flaws in some Western countries in the second part of this essay.
The U.S. has long positioned itself as a leader in promoting democratic values and supporting democratic movements. However, U.S. military interventions, support for authoritarian regimes for strategic reasons, or meddling in the domestic politics of foreign countries to provoke regime change when there is a leftist or socialist elected government, as we have often experienced in Latin America, have been perceived as inconsistent with its democratic ideals. This has led to questions about the sincerity and consistency of its democracy promotion efforts.
In Latin American history, the U.S. implemented or helped implement dictatorships in countries like Guatemala in 1954, Brazil in 1964, the Dominican Republic in 1965, Chile in 1973, Nicaragua in 1980, and Grenada in 1983, among others, as well as in Iran in 1953 and elsewhere in the world. At the same time, it was propagated that they were bringing democracy and human rights. With such a contradictory narrative, their credibility for many in those countries was damaged, though not for most Europeans, including scholars, who strangely believed in American “bringing democracy” propaganda.
A Deeper Democratic Perspective in the Global South: Participatory Democracy
In many countries of the Global South, I have found unique forms of democracy and participatory processes have emerged that differ from those typically found in Western nations. Here are just a few examples:
Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Originating in Porto Alegre in 1989, participatory budgeting is a democratic process in which community members directly decide how to allocate parts of a public budget. This approach has empowered citizens, particularly in marginalized communities, and has been adopted by thousands of other cities and countries.
Local Governance in Kerala, India: Kerala has implemented a robust model of local self-governance, where significant funds and decision-making powers have been devolved to local panchayats (village councils). This model emphasizes grassroots participation and has led to significant improvements in social indicators. Further, India is advancing fast with online platforms for citizen participation and access to services.
Indigenous Autonomy in Bolivia: Bolivia’s 2009 constitution recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples to self-governance and communal ownership of land. This has allowed for a form of participatory governance where indigenous communities have a say in local governance and resource management according to their customs and traditions.
Baraza System in Tanzania: In some parts of Tanzania, the traditional Baraza system, which involves community meetings where all members have a voice, continues to play a role in decision-making. This communal participation reinforces social cohesion and collective problem-solving.
Barangay Assemblies in the Philippines: The barangay (village) assemblies are grassroots gatherings where residents can discuss and vote on local issues. This form of participatory democracy allows citizens to engage directly with local governance processes.
Villager Committees in China: In China, one form of participatory democracy is the election of villager committees in rural areas. These committees are responsible for managing local affairs and are elected by residents of the village. These local elections offer a level of grassroots participation and give villagers a voice in their immediate governance and community development. Further, a high-level bureaucrat must start at the local level and have their administration successful and approved to achieve further advancement.
Ward Committees in South Africa: Established in terms of the Municipal Structures Act (1998), ward committees are designed to enhance participatory governance at the local level. Each committee consists of elected representatives from the community who work closely with municipal councils to provide input on local issues, development projects, and service delivery. These committees serve as a platform for residents to voice their concerns, share ideas, and collaborate with local government officials, facilitating greater community involvement in decision-making processes.
Participatory Urban Planning in Curitiba, Brazil: Curitiba is noted for its innovative urban planning and participatory governance initiatives, including public transportation development. Public meetings and planning forums (in person and online) allow citizens to contribute ideas and feedback, which have been integral in shaping Curitiba’s efficient and sustainable bus rapid transit system, and health and educational services. Additionally, Curitiba has implemented participatory budgeting processes to allow citizens to have a say in how portions of the city’s budget are spent. Even while living in Europe, I still participate in these processes in my neighbourhood.
In summary, from a Global South perspective, I would point out that there are numerous examples of participatory democracy that you won’t find in the West. In the academic realm, I come from a tradition where the rector and heads of departments at public, federal universities are elected by three groups: students, technical/bureaucratic staff, and faculty (each group has one vote).
There are many issues regarding the health of Western democracies, a sort of sclerose, which makes it challenging to label them as the definitive democratic model. Yes, a democratic regime can become “sclerosed” in the sense that it becomes rigid, unresponsive, and less effective in representing its citizens, ultimately leading to a decline in democratic quality and practice. This will be examined in part two of this essay.
Ricardo Martins ‒PhD in Sociology, specializing in policies, European and world politics and geopolitics, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
